MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022866937 · doi:10.3168/jds.2019-18023

Investigation of weaning strategy and solid feed location for dairy calves individually fed with an automated milk feeding system

2020· article· en· W3022866937 on OpenAlexaff
S.D. Parsons, M.A. Steele, K.E. Leslie, D.L. Renaud, T.J. DeVries

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeaningStarterAnimal scienceStrawFactorial experimentBiologyMathematicsFood scienceAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of 2 gradual weaning programs and 2 locations of solid feed within individual calf pens on feed intake, growth, and behavior of calves fed milk by an automated milk feeder. Using a 2 × 2 factorial design, 60 female calves were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 weaning treatments and 1 of 2 solid feed placement treatments. Calves were assigned to a continuous gradual weaning program (CG) or a multi-step gradual weaning program (MG). Calves assigned to the CG treatment had their milk allocation reduced in small, equal increments from 12.5 L/d on d 43 to 2 L/d on d 56. Calves assigned to the MG treatment were offered 10 L/d on d 43 to 45, 8 L/d on d 46 to 49, 6 L/d on d 50 to 52, and 3 L/d on d 53 to 56. Solid feed was placed either at the front of the pen adjacent (ADJ) to where the automated milk feeder offered milk or at the back of the pen on the opposite (OPP) side from where the milk was offered. All calves were offered 12.5 L/d of milk replacer from d 2 to 42, fresh solid feed (5% chopped wheat straw mixed with 95% calf starter pellet) from d 5 onward, and ad libitum water starting d 0. Calves were weaned from d 43 to 56 and additionally monitored from d 57 to 70. No interactions of effects of weaning and feed location treatment were detected. Both MG and CG calves had similar water and solid feed consumption, blood β-hydroxybutyrate concentrations, and behavior. By design, calves on the CG treatment consumed greater amounts of milk during the weaning phase than MG treatment calves (6.7 vs. 6.3 L/d), which resulted in milk drinking behavior differing between the treatments during the weaning phase. Although average daily gain and body weights were similar between treatments, MG calves had greater middle girth gain during wk 7 compared with CG calves (0.6 vs. 0.3 cm/d). Calves on the ADJ treatment consumed 16.7% more solid feed and 0.55 L/d more milk during the preweaning phase compared with OPP treatment calves. In all 3 phases, ADJ treatment calves consumed more water than OPP treatment calves. The ADJ calves spent more time consuming solid feed during the 10-wk period. The ADJ treatment calves had 10% greater average daily gain compared with OPP treatment calves during the preweaning phase. Overall, the results indicate that both gradual weaning treatments resulted in similar performance and behavior. However, placement of solid feed next to the milk source was demonstrated to increase feed, water, and milk intake during the preweaning stage, contributing to greater growth.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207